## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Product E2E probes measure when acknowledgements and replies become
visible.
> - A poll gives a time interval for an event.
> - The first positive poll can occur after a target that the event
could still meet.
> - This pull request compares the full interval with a strict or
inclusive target.
> - Reports retain the raw observations and the original verdict when
the timing verdict changes.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
A historical acknowledgement was absent at 1901 ms and first present at
2427 ms. A report marked the 2000 ms target as failed. The interval
crosses that target, so the available evidence cannot give a pass or
fail verdict.
**Expected behavior**
Return pass when the full interval meets the target. Return fail when
the full interval rules out the target. Return inconclusive for overlap,
invalid evidence, or insufficient evidence. Respect strict and inclusive
targets and open and closed endpoints.
**Steps to reproduce**
Run the deterministic timing tests. Use the acknowledgement interval
`(1901, 2427] ms` with `<= 2000 ms`. Compare the late reply interval
`(52965, 53334] ms` with `<= 30000 ms`. The first is inconclusive. The
second fails.
**Paperclip version or commit**
The source includes master at
`14afc12124017d4ec30d0f4bfd6892f8ce475d21`.
Related PR:
[#13710](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/13710) changed
chat latency and session reuse. This change corrects probe evidence and
report verdicts.
## What Changed
- Add a shared interval classifier with explicit endpoint and target
operators.
- Start observation before dispatch. Use a monotonic clock. Bound
asynchronous reads by request start and completion.
- Measure the first visible response separately from message creation
and final settlement. Share browser reads with an optional
acknowledgement probe.
- Keep raw bounds, clock resolution, message metadata, failed reads, and
original verdicts in retained report evidence.
- Add deterministic coverage for threshold equality, missing data,
edited messages, asynchronous reads, teardown, report correction, and a
finite-domain oracle.
- Bound observer shutdown to one second across pending and final reads.
Retain timeout counts. Ignore late completions and start no more reads
after shutdown.
- Document the timing contract in the existing Product E2E guide.
- Keep current startup reuse evidence after the master merge. Update
four stale test expectations for qualified Copilot admission. Keep the
explicit suite and provider restrictions.
## Verification
- Current head: `c42e87e6d3b4b347e7cb176f56819c1d0abe106d`.
- Passed: `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit` (3,287 Vitest tests and 128 native
completion tests; two explicit skips).
- Passed: `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`, `pnpm -r typecheck`, `pnpm
build`, `pnpm check:token-gates`, and `git diff origin/master --check`.
- Passed: [exact-head
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39607140418),
including both required checks (`ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`), all
general and serialized test jobs, all eight browser shards, build,
canary dry run, and the clean public npm-install smoke.
- Greptile reviewed the complete current diff and returned [5/5 with no
actionable
issues](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/16829#issuecomment-6266704814).
All review threads are resolved.
- The redundant local `pnpm test:run` was stopped after the exact-head
CI test jobs passed. It did not produce a complete local verdict; the
full repository test evidence is the CI run above.
- The [earlier broad
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39249282597)
failed on the old head. Its full test command timed out after 15
minutes. Five E2E support failures came from ambient `NODE_PATH` and a
missing historical Git object. Current master supplies the
closed-environment launcher and retained source fixture. The full
support suite passes with these fixes.
- After the current master merge, four stale Copilot assertions and the
nested unit launcher failed. Copilot is now qualified. Those assertions
now require no qualification override and retain the rejected
suite/provider cases. The full documented unit command passes.
- The first local typecheck after the merge used stale generated package
declarations and failed. The typechecks pass after `pnpm build`.
- These checks use synthetic timing evidence. They make no live provider
calls and claim no new live latency measurement.
## Risks
- The browser diagnostic depends on the existing message and receipt DOM
markers. Controlled tests cover visibility, receipt separation,
concurrent reads, and teardown.
- Corrected timing verdicts can become inconclusive. The report keeps
the original verdict and does not change the overall workflow grade.
- This change adds no database migration or product surface.
## Model Used
- OpenAI GPT-6 Codex. Model family: GPT-6. This session does not expose
a more specific model ID or context window size. The agent used
reasoning, shell tools, code inspection, and deterministic tests. The
earlier implementation session did not retain its exact model ID.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Use production hire instructions and the existing paid browser harness. Compare delivered bytes with the actual checkout, require retained workspace and context, and reject timer or user-driven continuation. Keep current qualified provider admission free of ambient overrides and retain explicit pending-profile gate controls.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip manages agents that perform work for a company.
> - Task repositories are prepared at normal run admission.
> - A running native task can stage a repository while its work remains
unfinished.
> - The controller did not offer that saved setup as a continuation.
> - The agent could add a timer or wait for a user restart.
> - This change uses the existing same-agent continuation and status
ledger.
> - The accepted explanation and proven conversation remain available
after setup.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #17045. That prerequisite has merged. This PR targets master.
**What happened?**
A projectless native task can request a repository for the next
admission. An unfinished task has no server-selected repository
continuation. An explicit same-agent continuation also loses chat
provenance.
**Expected behavior**
An unfinished standard task can yield and resume through the existing
admission queue. Its explanation and final result retain the authorized
conversation. A task that only stages a repository can complete without
another run.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Start a native standard task in a task directory.
2. Request an authorized repository through prepare_repository.
3. Yield with unfinished work and no explicit continuation.
4. Observe that the former driver rejects the yield, although the
pending repository is saved.
## What Changed
- Offer a saved same-agent continuation for the current task's pending
repository.
- Accept that current server continuation in the shared provider driver.
- Resolve chat provenance through applied status decisions, delivered
effects, and admitted wakes.
- Preserve accepted setup explanations without repeating an owned
question card.
- Document optional reproduction details and configured repository
discovery.
- Extend database regressions and workspace access maps.
- Preserve Copilot profile v52 and bind the shared continuation source
in v53. Include the active identity in the QA image fingerprint.
## Verification
- Five focused server suites: 100 checks pass.
- Shared continuation driver: 12 checks pass.
- Server typecheck passes.
- Map contract and whitespace checks pass.
- Existing API and driver assertions fail on the former implementation.
- Real dispatcher and queue cohort: 43 checks pass. The original
reply-loss regression fails before the dispatch receipt fix.
- Continuation driver and installation identity cohort: 62 checks pass.
- Regenerated capability inventory and contract checks pass.
- Final response precedence cohort: 109 checks pass. The stale-comment
case fails on the former implementation.
- All required CI checks, build, and both source reviews pass on
b9c8677635.
- Live provider journeys and deployed acceptance remain pending. No live
qualification is claimed.
## Risks
A pending repository now offers a next admission when unfinished
standard work yields. Incorrect eligibility could create unwanted work.
The lookup requires the current workspace and task. Explicit completion
does not use it. Existing Stop, admission, approval, and transport
authorization remain authoritative. No schema or public task-status
change is included. The shared continuation change requires a new
Copilot source identity. This PR preserves v52 history and does not
claim fresh Copilot live qualification.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with repository tools and code execution.
The runtime does not expose its exact deployment ID or context-window
size. Those values are not inferred.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Core onboarding selects an agent and connects its provider account.
> - The current flow creates the agent record after authentication.
> - Setup needs a stable agent identity as soon as the user submits its
name.
> - This PR saves a paused setup record on name submission and finishes
the hire on that same record.
> - The existing sandbox authentication and approval paths continue to
apply.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Subsystem affected**
Core agent lifecycle, shared validators, and onboarding UI.
**Current behavior**
Onboarding creates the database record at the final hire step. Earlier
authentication and saved setup have no agent record.
**Proposed behavior**
Create a paused agent with a setup hold when the user submits its name.
Do this before adapter selection or authentication. Update that same
record after adapter selection. Reuse its ID on retries and saved setup.
Finish that record through the existing hire path.
**Reason and benefit**
Give setup a stable identity without coupling this refactor to computer
provisioning or a new execution backend.
**Breaking changes**
Incomplete setup now leaves an inactive agent record. Existing clients
can still create and hire agents without the new optional fields. The
sandbox authentication flow and API key support remain in place.
**Additional context**
Requested Core-only refactor. Related work: #15422 changes runner
defaults. This PR preserves those choices. No duplicate early-record
refactor was found in the issue and PR search.
## What Changed
- Save the agent when the user submits its name in both onboarding entry
points. Use a provisional adapter until the user chooses one. Reopen
name-only drafts at adapter selection.
- Add retry-safe setup creation and same-record hire completion. Keep
approval checks at final hire.
- Save and restore setup configuration in both onboarding entry points.
Show Finish setup for paused setup agents.
- Restrict setup changes to authorized board users. Block generic resume
until setup finishes.
- Add lifecycle, authorization, connection, and UI coverage. Update the
specification and feature maps.
## Verification
- Latest focused server run: 126 lifecycle and AI-connection tests
passed after the Apex fixes. An earlier broader run passed 301
lifecycle, instruction, adapter-validation, and AI-connection tests.
Earlier authentication, retry, cross-company, and direct-create
regressions also passed.
- Name-save verification: 336 tests across the wizard, naming dialog,
New agent, action-button, and wizard-step suites passed. Coverage
includes retry identity, repeated submission, closing during a save,
saved-model restoration, and a disabled process adapter.
- Shared, server, and UI TypeScript checks passed. The latest UI package
check and direct server TypeScript check passed. The server package
preparation command could not finish locally because Cargo is
unavailable; full build preparation runs in CI. Map checks, token gates,
and `git diff --check` passed; each pushed diff was scanned for
credentials and PII.
- All six onboarding browser tests passed together with installed Chrome
against a fresh throwaway instance after the Apex fixes. They include
numbered duplicate names, first-time Copilot without a connected
account, and Grok’s saved model. They verify early persistence in both
entry points, closing and reopening a name-only draft, same-record
adapter selection, sandbox sign-in, login reload, and failed-connection
gating. Provider responses are simulated; Core persistence is real.
- Regression coverage includes incomplete Copilot creation versus final
validation, Kimi settings through redacted responses, stale local
drafts, company switches during creation, saved environments, and
provider changes with personal/shared old bindings.
- Apex found five name-only setup gaps: numbered names, early Copilot
account validation, the Grok model default, same-name draft ownership,
and provisional runner restoration. The fixes preserve server names,
defer implicit account binding until hire, set Grok’s model, avoid
name-based reuse of unfinished records, and restore Auto for pending
adapter choices. UI, database, and browser regressions cover these
cases.
- Standard Greptile found a Grok provider mismatch in the new adapter
save. The save now uses ACPX with the Grok profile. Both the 129-test
dialog/setup run and a real-API browser regression passed after the fix.
The first browser attempt stopped on an ambiguous empty-roster button
selector; it now scopes the click to the toolbar.
- Moving the save point exposed a saved-model reset and timing
assumptions in the same-name and portal fixtures. The source choice now
preserves the restored model, and tests cover same-name recovery without
a second hire.
- Initial CI exposed direct-create compatibility, concurrent setup
effects, fixture assumptions, and a missing-fields assumption in the
provider-validation guard. These were fixed and verified locally. Review
findings were addressed with authorization, recovery,
credential-persistence, and restored-configuration regressions.
- The final desktop capture passed after host resource cleanup. A repeat
first failed before Core started because macOS had exhausted
shared-memory IDs. Standalone PostgreSQL initialization reproduced the
same error. Releasing only unattached control segments from this task’s
stopped test databases allowed the unchanged revision to pass. No Core
or system setting changed.
- Local database tests required port access outside the sandbox. Missing
declared development dependencies were supplied outside the branch. No
live provider sign-in was tested locally.
- [Full monorepo
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39522434236)
is green on `82b82fec189a172a885d4dd565ae2f4a18c73efc`. Standard
Greptile scored 5/5 with zero new comments (check `118969424903`). The
subsequent Apex review also scored 5/5 with zero new comments (check
`118972866331`) on that same commit. All review threads are resolved.
- The separate Superagent Security scan returned neutral/inconclusive
because its pinned merge-base checkout failed or timed out. GitHub
returned 404 for check and suite rerun requests. This is not a
successful security scan; the CI workflow and other security checks
passed.
## Risks
- Users can leave inactive setup records behind, including after name
submission alone. These records cannot run until hire completes.
- Setup completion touches hiring and approval boundaries. Tests cover
retries, company isolation, creator permissions, and approval snapshots.
- An uncertain credential-save result retains its new secret reference
for retry. A confirmed client rejection removes only credentials staged
by that attempt.
- No schema migration or VM provisioning change is required.
Agent-computer integration is out of scope.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with repository search, code editing, and
tool execution. The exact deployment ID and context window are not
exposed in this session.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] Apex Greptile is also 5/5 on the same commit as standard review
and green CI
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The control plane must retain work when an execution or workspace
export fails.
> - Retained-workspace holds can leave saved input waiting with no
usable Retry action.
> - Users cannot verify process ownership or repair provider
allocations.
> - This pull request gives system recovery a durable budget and gives
each deliberate Retry a durable intent.
> - Safe recovery can preserve files, settle an accepted result, or
prepare an independent workspace.
> - One task state keeps infrastructure diagnostics out of the ordinary
conversation while preserving real permission and approval gates.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
A task with a retained workspace can show recovery, failed-run and
saved-message warnings at the same time. Historical runs without native
workspace descriptors cannot use the native restore path. Old recovery
metadata can prevent a new attempt even when an independent workspace
would be safe.
**Expected behavior**
Paperclip owns bounded infrastructure retries and file preservation. A
user can request another attempt with ordinary Retry. Thinking appears
immediately. The service preserves completed effects and current user
controls. It does not claim that starting fresh recovered the old files.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Retain a failed run and its workspace after export or process-stop
failure.
2. Save a follow-up while the recovery hold is active.
3. Open the task and try to continue without infrastructure credentials
or operator certification.
Refs #16906, #16835, #16883. This extends their recovery and receipt
contracts. Related work: #16962 and #16963.
## What Changed
- Add task-level Retry with company-scoped authorization, all-status
idempotency and durable admission before physical work. Keep exact-run
Retry compatible.
- Add typed recovery phases, finite persisted backoff, historical
adoption and durable local failure diagnostics.
- Preserve native workspaces or verified historical snapshots. Admit an
independent fresh workspace only after execution containment. Keep
old-source preservation and cleanup obligations separate.
- Carry completed publication and API receipts forward. Fence uncertain
mutation retries across replacement runs. Preserve connected-chat
identity and authorization.
- Re-enter normal dispatch for saved input. Reuse accepted results
through the existing finalizer.
- Use one task interruption projection across the thread, composer and
task list. Show optimistic Thinking, ordinary Retry and genuine user
gates.
- Add PostgreSQL, filesystem, API, browser-fixture and controlled
provider coverage. Document the behavior and update the feature/access
maps.
## Verification
- All GitHub Actions CI jobs pass on
`6d8c6d27d50586d8548b31d03b47f6d73a0ee11d`: typecheck, all
server/chat/workspace and serialized suites, Runner checks, eight
browser shards, canary and build. The required merge gate passes.
- Greptile reviewed the final commit at 5/5, with no actionable findings
or unresolved review threads. Its two earlier P1 findings are fixed.
- Full recursive typecheck and build pass locally on the final commit.
All 16 task Retry cases pass against isolated real PostgreSQL. The
unrelated-success case and both stale Retry cases fail on the previous
code and pass after the fix.
- The corrected gateway fixture passes its uncertain-mutation and
independent-read case. Four real HTTP API cases pass for definite
403/422 rejection, completed-effect reuse, and uncertain-effect fences
across deliberate and automatic retries. These focused gateway/API
checks used a temporary database lifecycle harness on an existing
healthy local PostgreSQL process. The standard repository helper is
unchanged.
- Earlier qualification covers 291 task UI cases, saved-file copyback
and ancestry, current Agent Chat ownership races, nine chat Retry API
browser cases, and six assembled browser recovery fixtures. A real
API/PostgreSQL/native-runner journey showed Thinking in 25 ms despite a
delayed response, admitted one successor in a separate workspace,
retained original files, and survived reload.
- The controlled Daytona test interrupts export, joins the controller,
restarts it in a separate process, and verifies one agent start, one
external sentinel operation, retained file contents and no premature
cleanup. It does not establish abrupt-kill or live LLM/GitHub
acceptance.
- The full local `pnpm test:run` was attempted and was not green: an
OAuth row-lock timing assertion failed, and a later suite exhausted
macOS PostgreSQL semaphores. The ten OAuth timing cases passed on rerun
against a separate database. Later embedded database initialization
failures remain recorded; the final CI matrix passes.
- Security scanning passed on production-code commit
`63953edf069b111c6becc3144dffa6deb52f68b5`. Its only successor changes
one test-fixture identity line. The final scan is neutral/inconclusive
because its pinned merge-base checkout failed or timed out. Both rerun
API requests returned 404, so no fresh successful scan is claimed.
Socket and Snyk checks pass on the final head.
- The optional Paperclip Review remains queued behind an earlier run in
workspace finalization. Its prior completed assessment was incomplete
because a comparison tool was blocked by the platform filter. It is not
counted as a completed code review. GitHub does not require this check
for merge.
- Hosted acceptance remains pending deployment. Local and CI results do
not establish recovery of a hosted task or its retained files.
## Risks
- Recovery changes span admission, physical ownership and dispatch.
Incorrect evidence could permit overlapping work. Existing physical
locks and authoritative stop requirements remain in place.
- The migration adds concurrent indexes. It requires the existing
top-level migration runner and retries incomplete index creation safely.
- A fresh attempt can complete while old-source preservation remains
unresolved. The service retains that obligation and does not report
those files as recovered.
- Unknown tool mutations remain blocked until their authoritative
receipt owner resolves them. Generic upstream tools have no universal
result-query protocol.
- Recovery and diagnostics stay inside the stack. No Cloud incident
endpoint, notification worker or new outbound reporting channel is
included.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The runtime does not expose a more specific
model version or context-window size. The model used reasoning, shell
execution, source editing and browser tools. No model subagents were
used for this implementation.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (focused suites; the full
local run limitation is documented above)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Product E2E campaigns test runner behavior across agent profiles and
environments.
> - The retained reports contain many suites, cases, and execution
previews.
> - A long report makes it hard to find a case or return to the campaign
context.
> - This pull request adds campaign navigation, case breadcrumbs, and
separate global history pages.
> - Users can scan all execution previews or inspect one case without
losing their place.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What existing behavior does this improve?**
Navigation in the retained Runner E2E campaign reports and history
homepage.
**Subsystem affected**
Test report infrastructure in `tests/runner-e2e/`.
**Current behavior**
Reports show a long configuration matrix. The suite index and campaign
history share the same page. Case links do not provide a focused
inspection view.
**Proposed behavior**
Global overview, history, and attention pages show global navigation. A
specific campaign adds a folding suite tree. All results keeps the full
scrollable report. A case opens with breadcrumbs and an execution
picker.
**Reason and benefit**
Users can find a case, compare its executions, and return to their
reading position. Global pages do not show suites from an unrelated
campaign.
**Breaking changes**
The report HTML layout changes. Retained result schemas, execution
identities, and suite and execution anchors remain unchanged.
**Additional context**
Refs: #16996. This extends the merged report navigation and local
preview work. The duplicate PR and issue search found no open PR for
this change.
## What Changed
- Add shared report navigation with the Paperclip brand mark and
wordmark.
- Scope the suite tree to the current campaign. Keep global overview,
history, and attention pages separate.
- Group all execution previews by suite and case. Reuse the existing
evidence cards and image gallery.
- Add focused case inspection, configuration selection, breadcrumbs,
filter handling, and scroll restoration.
- Move historical trends to the global history page. Keep billing
details, missing results, and failure evidence available.
- Update report documentation and browser regressions for filters,
status dots, configuration reloads, breadcrumbs, and scroll restoration.
## Verification
- [Final
CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39500401411)
passes on `89a8b5c290de3cfb9bdc061be3c88a29fd160a62`. Typecheck, build,
runner checks, server suites, and all browser shards pass.
- All four report browser regressions pass. They cover filters, gallery
navigation, repeated suite jumps, the folding sidebar, breadcrumbs,
scroll restoration, configuration selection and reload, mobile
navigation, and aggregate case status.
- The 63 report, history, preview-boundary, and navigation tests pass.
Runner E2E typecheck passes with `node node_modules/typescript/bin/tsc
-p tests/runner-e2e/tsconfig.json`.
- Manual browser checks covered desktop and a 390-pixel viewport.
Retained campaigns covered 209 executions in eight suites, 179
executions in seven suites, and 15 executions in one suite. Browser
fixture checks also confirmed filtered inspection and aggregate status.
No paid evaluations ran.
- The initial report browser tests still targeted the old layout and
routes. They were updated for the new navigation. Review also exposed
filtered-inspection and aggregate-status defects; both were fixed before
the final passing browser run.
- The unchanged Cases UI grouping test [failed once on the final
head](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39500401411/job/118898559197).
Its full file also failed locally, while the isolated test passed. The
same UI code passed in earlier CI. A [single CI
retry](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/39500401411/job/118903333430)
passed all 3,978 UI tests and 286 CLI tests without code changes. The
cause remains unresolved.
- Two jobs on an intermediate head were interrupted by runner shutdown
signals. Those remain interrupted results. The complete final-head CI
run supersedes them for merge verification.
- Workspace `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` also passed locally
before the rebase. The full local `pnpm test:run` attempt encountered
repeated embedded PostgreSQL startup failures and was stopped. It is not
a passing local full-suite result; final CI provides the full
verification.
## Risks
- Navigation and hash handling can select the wrong case or hide
results. Focused tests and browser checks cover these paths.
- Historical campaign links must resolve from both the preview and
published report locations.
- The report layout changes. Graders, prompts, retained outcomes, and
billing calculations do not change.
## Model Used
- OpenAI Codex with `gpt-6-astra` and `gpt-6.1-sol`. Used reasoning,
repository tools, code execution, and browser verification. The runtime
did not expose a context-window size.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Remove dashed failure dividers and show only the latest adjacent run or recovery error. Preserve permitted retries, pending state and unrelated notice boundaries. Add production-component Storybook examples and browser regression coverage.
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app that people use to manage AI agents
for work.
> - Product E2E campaigns check user journeys across agent profiles and
environments.
> - Readers use the campaign history and reports to inspect results and
retained evidence.
> - The reports showed image summaries, many unselected suites, and a
long sticky index.
> - Individual case cards also showed routine diagnostics before the
visual evidence.
> - This pull request adds text summaries, feature filters, folding case
indexes, and simpler cards.
> - A local preview uses retained public data so designers can change
reports without another paid campaign.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**Current behavior**
The report is hard to scan as the journey catalog grows. Suite links can
point into hidden results. Case indexes do not show whether a case
passed across its configurations. Design changes also need a realistic
local preview.
**Proposed behavior**
Show the selected campaign as text. Link journeys to current feature-map
capabilities. Add folding case indexes with status indicators, reliable
section links, and a back-to-top control. Keep failed outcomes visible
and put routine diagnostics under Test details. Render retained public
campaign data with local templates.
**Reason and benefit**
Readers can find a feature or failed case faster. Designers can iterate
against real retained data without starting an application instance or
using provider credentials.
**Breaking changes**
No result schema or grading change. The report stops embedding the
generated summary PNG. The publisher still produces that artifact for
existing consumers.
Related work: #12889 added the existing matrix browser. #12846 concerns
the public image publication boundary. This PR changes report
presentation and local preview behavior.
## What Changed
- Replace image summaries with shared HTML suite summaries on the
history and campaign pages.
- Show selected executions and preserve missing results for selected
cells.
- Add explicit journey-to-capability associations, feature filters, and
a coverage view with unmapped journeys.
- Add folding case indexes, section case lists, and red, green, or amber
status indicators across matching configurations.
- Fix anchor navigation through filters and add a floating back-to-top
control.
- Simplify case cards. Keep failure reasons visible. Fold routine
checks, billing, and context into Test details.
- Add an original-image link to the gallery.
- Add a local preview utility with public data caching and offline mode.
Document the direct Node command.
- Test manifest-listed evidence, rejection of unlisted files and encoded
traversal, cache reuse, and offline misses with a real loopback server
and a stub downloader.
## Verification
- Focused report, history, and preview tests: 75 passed in 6 files.
- Report Playwright spec: 4 passed in Chrome with a standalone config
that does not start the application server.
- `node scripts/check-maps.mjs`: passed.
- `git diff --check`: passed.
- Manually checked retained campaign reports, feature filters, folding
indexes, failure links, card details, gallery links, mobile layout, and
keyboard navigation.
- `pnpm build`: passed.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed.
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:typecheck`: passed.
- `pnpm test:run`: stopped after 15 native session database cases
failed. The local Postgres package first lacked dynamic-library links.
After link hydration, the same cases still failed. A direct `initdb`
check then reported `could not create semaphores: No space left on
device` and identified the macOS semaphore limit. The complete local
suite has not passed.
- `pnpm test:e2e:runner:unit`: 3,250 passed, 6 failed, 2 skipped. All
six failures reproduced against unchanged `origin/master` report sources
with the same installed dependencies. They concern Copilot admission and
its Daytona image input, plus the launcher test that runs those
assertions. No report or history test failed.
- No live provider evaluation was run for this presentation change.
- CI on `b1a9c06823` first failed browser shard 3/8. The agent-chat
split-handoff test reached cleanup, where cancelling a run returned HTTP
500 from a Postgres deadlock. Cleanup did not restore the experiment
setting, and a later test failed its initial setting check. This shard
does not contain the report spec. One targeted rerun passed, and that
full workflow then passed. This shows recovery; no production fix was
made for the deadlock. The later preview-test commit requires its own
fresh checks.
To review the design, run `node --watch --import
./cli/node_modules/tsx/dist/loader.mjs tests/runner-e2e/preview.ts`.
Open the history address printed by the command, then open a campaign.
The README covers offline mode and cache refresh.
## Risks
- Feature associations use the current map. They describe linked
scenarios, not proof that a whole capability is covered. Historical
grades remain unchanged.
- New or unfamiliar cases remain unmapped until their assertions are
inspected.
- The preview needs the public history host on first access. Offline
mode requires cached files. It binds to the loopback interface and
serves manifest-listed public evidence.
- Hiding routine diagnostics adds one disclosure step. Failed or
incomplete outcomes remain visible.
This is report polish. It does not duplicate planned core work in
`ROADMAP.md`.
## Model Used
OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, tool use, code execution,
and browser automation. The exact serving model ID and context window
are not exposed in this session.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
---------
Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Dotta